Abstract
This protocol is an extension to: Nat. Protoc. 1, 1552–1558 (2006); doi:10.1038/nprot.2006.276; published online 9 November 2006
This article describes how to reliably electroporate with DNA plasmids rodent neuronal progenitors of the hippocampus; the motor, prefrontal and visual cortices; and the cerebellum in utero. As a Protocol Extension article, this article describes an adaptation of an existing Protocol and offers additional applications. The earlier protocol describes how to electroporate mouse embryos using two standard forceps-type electrodes. In the present protocol, additional electroporation configurations are possible because of the addition of a third electrode alongside the two standard forceps-type electrodes. By adjusting the position and polarity of the three electrodes, the electric field can be directed with great accuracy to different neurogenic areas. Bilateral transfection of brain hemispheres can be achieved after a single electroporation episode. Approximately 75% of electroporated embryos survive to postnatal ages, and depending on the target area, 50–90% express the electroporated vector. The electroporation procedure takes 1 h 35 min. The protocol is suitable for the preparation of animals for various applications, including histochemistry, behavioral studies, electrophysiology and in vivo imaging.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Saito, T. In vivo electroporation in the embryonic mouse central nervous system. Nat. Protoc. 1, 1552–1558 (2006).
Szczurkowska, J. et al. High-performance and reliable site-directed in vivo genetic manipulation of mouse and rat brain by in utero electroporation with a triple-electrode probe. Protoc. Exchange doi:10.1038/protex.2013.089 (2013).
De la Rossa, A. & Jabaudon, D. In vivo rapid gene delivery into postmitotic neocortical neurons using iontoporation. Nat. Protoc. 10, 25–32 (2015).
Waleed, M. et al. Single-cell optoporation and transfection using femtosecond laser and optical tweezers. Biomed. Opt. Express 4, 1533–1547 (2013).
Karda, R. et al. Perinatal systemic gene delivery using adeno-associated viral vectors. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 7, 89 (2014).
Kalli, C., Teoh, W.C. & Leen, E. Introduction of genes via sonoporation and electroporation. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 818, 231–254 (2014).
Murlidharan, G., Samulski, R.J. & Asokan, A. Biology of adeno-associated viral vectors in the central nervous system. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 7, 76 (2014).
Ojala, D.S., Amara, D.P. & Schaffer, D.V. Adeno-associated virus vectors and neurological gene therapy. Neuroscientist 21, 84–98 (2015).
Fukuchi-Shimogori, T. & Grove, E.A. Neocortex patterning by the secreted signaling molecule FGF8. Science 294, 1071–1074 (2001).
Saito, T. & Nakatsuji, N. Efficient gene transfer into the embryonic mouse brain using in vivo electroporation. Dev. Biol. 240, 237–246 (2001).
Tabata, H. & Nakajima, K. Efficient in uterogene transfer system to the developing mouse brain using electroporation: visualization of neuronal migration in the developing cortex. Neuroscience 103, 865–872 (2001).
LoTurco, J., Manent, J.B. & Sidiqi, F. New and improved tools for in uteroelectroporation studies of developing cerebral cortex. Cereb. Cortex 19 (suppl. 1), i120–i125 (2009).
dal Maschio, M. et al. High-performance and site-directed in utero electroporation by a triple-electrode probe. Nat. Commun. 3, 960 (2012).
Navarro-Quiroga, I., Chittajallu, R., Gallo, V. & Haydar, T.F. Long-term, selective gene expression in developing and adult hippocampal pyramidal neurons using focal in utero electroporation. J. Neurosci. 27, 5007–5011 (2007).
Niwa, M. et al. Knockdown of DISC1 by in utero gene transfer disturbs postnatal dopaminergic maturation in the frontal cortex and leads to adult behavioral deficits. Neuron 65, 480–489 (2010).
Cang, J. et al. Ephrin-as guide the formation of functional maps in the visual cortex. Neuron 48, 577–589 (2005).
Nishiyama, J. et al. Selective and regulated gene expression in murine Purkinje cells by in utero electroporation. Eur. J. Neurosci. 36, 2867–2876 (2012).
Kawauchi, D. & Saito, T. Transcriptional cascade from Math1 to Mbh1 and Mbh2 is required for cerebellar granule cell differentiation. Dev. Biol. 322, 345–354 (2008).
Vue, T.Y. et al. Sonic hedgehog signaling controls thalamic progenitor identity and nuclei specification in mice. J. Neurosci. 29, 4484–4497 (2009).
Tabata, H. & Nakajima, K. Labeling embryonic mouse central nervous system cells by in utero electroporation. Dev. Growth Differ. 50, 507–511 (2008).
Pacary, E. et al. Visualization and genetic manipulation of dendrites and spines in the mouse cerebral cortex and hippocampus using in utero electroporation. J. Vis. Exp. doi:10.3791/4163 (2012).
Dixit, R. et al. Efficient gene delivery into multiple CNS territories using in utero electroporation. J. Vis. Exp. doi:10.3791/2957 (2011).
Vomund, S., Sapir, T., Reiner, O., Silva, M.A. & Korth, C. Generation of topically transgenic rats by in utero electroporation and in vivo bioluminescence screening. J. Vis. Exp. doi:10.3791/50146 (2013).
Wang, C. & Mei, L. in utero electroporation in mice. Methods Mol. Biol. 1018, 151–163 (2013).
Svoboda, D.S., Clark, A., Park, D.S. & Slack, R.S. Induction of protein deletion through in utero electroporation to define deficits in neuronal migration in transgenic models. J. Vis. Exp. doi:10.3791/51983 (2015).
Shimogori, T. & Ogawa, M. Gene application with in utero electroporation in mouse embryonic brain. Dev. Growth Differ. 50, 499–506 (2008).
Walantus, W., Castaneda, D., Elias, L. & Kriegstein, A. in utero intraventricular injection and electroporation of E15 mouse embryos. J. Vis. Exp. doi:10.3791/239 (2007).
Walantus, W., Elias, L. & Kriegstein, A. in utero intraventricular injection and electroporation of E16 rat embryos. J. Vis. Exp. doi:10.3791/236 (2007).
Saito, T. in Electroporation Methods in Neuroscience Vol. 102 (ed. Saito, T.) Ch. 1, 1–20 (Springer, 2015).
Szczurkowska, J. et al. Increased performance in genetic manipulation by modeling the dielectric properties of the rodent brain. Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2013, 1615–1618 (2013).
Deidda, G. et al. Early depolarizing GABA controls critical-period plasticity in the rat visual cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 18, 87–96 (2015).
Perlini, L.E. et al. Synapsin III acts downstream of semaphorin 3A/CDK5 signaling to regulate radial migration and orientation of pyramidal neurons in vivo. Cell Rep. 11, 234–248 (2015).
Bony, G. et al. Non-hyperpolarizing GABAB receptor activation regulates neuronal migration and neurite growth and specification by cAMP/LKB1. Nat. Commun. 4, 1800 (2013).
Luft, C. & Ketteler, R. Electroporation knows no boundaries: the use of electrostimulation for siRNA delivery in cells and tissues. J. Biomol. Screen 20, 932 (2015).
Matsuda, T. & Cepko, C.L. Controlled expression of transgenes introduced by in vivo electroporation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 1027–1032 (2007).
Sato, T., Muroyama, Y. & Saito, T. Inducible gene expression in postmitotic neurons by an in vivo electroporation-based tetracycline system. J. Neurosci. Methods 214, 170–176 (2013).
Sato, T., Muroyama, Y. & Saito, T. in Electroporation Methods in Neuroscience Vol. 102 (ed. Saito, T.) Ch. 15, 187–195 (Springer, 2015).
Huber, D. et al. Sparse optical microstimulation in barrel cortex drives learned behaviour in freely moving mice. Nature 451, 61–64 (2008).
Rahim, A.A. et al. in utero gene transfer to the mouse nervous system. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 38, 1489–1493 (2010).
Bonnot, A., Mentis, G.Z., Skoch, J. & O'Donovan, M.J. Electroporation loading of calcium-sensitive dyes into the CNS. J. Neurophysiol. 93, 1793–1808 (2005).
Swartz, M., Eberhart, J., Mastick, G.S. & Krull, C.E. Sparking new frontiers: using in vivo electroporation for genetic manipulations. Dev. Biol. 233, 13–21 (2001).
Shelly, M., Cancedda, L., Heilshorn, S., Sumbre, G. & Poo, M.M. LKB1/STRAD promotes axon initiation during neuronal polarization. Cell 129, 565–577 (2007).
Cancedda, L., Fiumelli, H., Chen, K. & Poo, M.M. Excitatory GABA action is essential for morphological maturation of cortical neurons in vivo. J. Neurosci. 27, 5224–5235 (2007).
Zuccaro, E. et al. Polarized expression of p75NTR specifies axons during development and adult neurogenesis. Cell Rep. 7, 138–152 (2014).
Shelly, M. et al. Semaphorin3A regulates neuronal polarization by suppressing axon formation and promoting dendrite growth. Neuron 71, 433–446 (2011).
Shelly, M. et al. Local and long-range reciprocal regulation of cAMP and cGMP in axon/dendrite formation. Science 327, 547–552 (2010).
Liu, Y., Fu, S., Niu, R., Yang, C. & Lin, J. Transcriptional activity assessment of three different promoters for mouse in utero electroporation system. Plasmid 74, 52–58 (2014).
Arosio, D. & Ratto, G.M. Twenty years of fluorescence imaging of intracellular chloride. Front. Cell. Neurosci. 8, 258 (2014).
Arosio, D. et al. Simultaneous intracellular chloride and pH measurements using a GFP-based sensor. Nat. Methods 7, 516–518 (2010).
Theiler, K. The House Mouse : Atlas of Embryonic Development (Springer-Verlag, 1989).
Witschi, E. in Growth Including Reproduction and Morphological Development (eds. Altman, P.L. & Dittmer, D.S.) 304–314 (Fed. Am. Soc. Exp. Biol., 1962).
Acknowledgements
We thank S. Sulis Sato and P. Artoni (Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy) for performing the in vivo imaging of electroporated neurons, G. Deidda for the video showing visual cortex illumination in a live pup, F. Managò (IIT) for her idea to use a cell scraper as the holder for the third custom-made electrode, G. Pruzzo (IIT) for his technical help in crafting it, C. Garcia (IIT) for samples from long-term in utero electroporation experiments, A. Contestabile (IIT) for the recipe for the cleaning of surgical tools, and S.-I. Lee (Stony Brook University) for his assistance during some surgeries. The work was supported by Telethon nos. GGP10135 and GGP13187, and IIT interdepartmental grant Novel Site.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
J.S. performed in utero electroporation, wrote the manuscript and made the figures. A.W.C. contributed to in utero electroporation, performed immunohistochemistry, acquired the images and made the figures. J.S. and A.W.C. participated in the design of the experiments. M.d.M. assisted during in utero electroporation and made the Purkinje cell videos. D.G. assisted during in utero electroporation. G.M.R. set up the in vivo chloride imaging and made the video and the figure. L.C. performed in utero electroporation, designed the experiments and wrote the manuscript. G.M.R. and L.C. invented the triple-electrode configuration. All authors revised the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
L.C. and G.M.R. are co-inventors on a patent entitled “three-electrode electroporation device” (Patent number WO2012153291).
Integrated supplementary information
Supplementary Figure 1 Equipment for in utero electroporation.
(This figure is also available in Protocol Exchange doi:10.1038/protex.2013.089 (2013) and is reproduced with permission here to aid use of the protocol)
Supplementary Figure 2 Electrode configuration for tripolar in utero electroporation.
(a) The configuration for tripolar in utero electroporation entails two conventional forceps-type electrodes connected to a single polarity by a Y-connector and an additional custom-made third electrode. Scale bar: 5 cm. (b) High magnification of the Y-connector for connection of commercial forceps-like electrodes to a same pole. Scale bar: 1 cm. (This figure is also available in Protocol Exchange doi:10.1038/protex.2013.089 (2013) and is reproduced with permission here to aid use of the protocol)
Supplementary Figure 3 Tools for in utero electroporation.
(a) ring forceps (1), shark-tooth tissue forceps (2), scissors with flat shanks – angular (3), scissors with flat shanks – straight (4), Olsen-Hegar needle holders with scissors (5), scalpel (6), scalpel blade (7). (b) surgical tools, plastic connectors, surgical drape and gauze in a self-sealing autoclavable pouch. Scale bars: 2 cm. (This figure is also available in Protocol Exchange doi:10.1038/protex.2013.089 (2013) and is reproduced with permission here to aid use of the protocol)
Supplementary Figure 4 The fluorescence of the reporter gene can be enhanced by immunostaining with a specific antibody.
(a) Confocal image of EGFP fluorescence in a coronal section of a mouse neocortex at P7 after in utero transfection (at E15.5) in an experiment that resulted in low transfection efficiency. (b) Confocal image of the same slice after immunostaining with anti-GFP antibody (Abcam, cat. no. Ab13970; concentration 1:1000). Images in (a) and (b) were acquired using a confocal microscope with the same parameters. Scale bar: 100 µm.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Text and Figures
Supplementary Figures 1–4 (PDF 677 kb)
Identification of EGPF transfection by exposing live pups (P4) electroporated in the visual cortex in utero (E17.5) to a fluorescent-protein flashlight lamp.
This simple and quick method is extremely useful to distinguish upfront successful electroporations from failures. (MOV 1568 kb)
3D cell reconstructions of Purkinje cells of the rat cerebellum at P14.
For 3D reconstructions of the morphology of transfected neurons in brain slices, it is important to achieve a compromise between spatial resolution, time of acquisition and potential bleaching of the chromophores during image acquisition. To achieve this aim, we recommend performing a serial acquisition of tiled z-stacks to cover a complete slice using a 40X oil immersion objective (1.4 NA). The field of view should be 350 × 350 μm−2, with 0.2 × 0.2 × 0.5 voxel size, and should be acquired with 3 line averaging. The power at the sample should be kept as low as possible to prevent bleaching over the relatively long exposures (45 min per slice, typically). Rendering of acquired data can be performed with freely available software packages (e.g., Fiji\3D viewer or pictograph libraries) or with more sophisticated and dedicated consoles (e.g., Imaris or Huygens). (MOV 1014 kb)
3D cell reconstruction of an isolated Purkinje cell of the rat cerebellum at P14.
Image acquisition and cell reconstruction were performed as described for Supplementary video 2. (MOV 4953 kb)
Tripolar in utero electroporation allows in vivo chloride imaging in the visual cortex.
Video for Figure 12. (AVI 19604 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Szczurkowska, J., Cwetsch, A., dal Maschio, M. et al. Targeted in vivo genetic manipulation of the mouse or rat brain by in utero electroporation with a triple-electrode probe. Nat Protoc 11, 399–412 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2016.014
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2016.014
This article is cited by
-
A developmental increase of inhibition promotes the emergence of hippocampal ripples
Nature Communications (2024)
-
Aβ42 oligomers trigger synaptic loss through CAMKK2-AMPK-dependent effectors coordinating mitochondrial fission and mitophagy
Nature Communications (2022)
-
Precise levels of nectin-3 are required for proper synapse formation in postnatal visual cortex
Neural Development (2020)
-
Modelling genetic mosaicism of neurodevelopmental disorders in vivo by a Cre-amplifying fluorescent reporter
Nature Communications (2020)
-
The development of synaptic transmission is time-locked to early social behaviors in rats
Nature Communications (2019)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.